he proposed savings in medicare. he wants republican to join him by making upward adjustments on the revenue side of the books. in other words, he is being a ledder, not a bad way to end the week. that's "hardball" for now. "all in" with chris hayes starts right now. this is federal district court judge edwardman. there are 27 of them in the eastern district alone and i haven't put in the time to make any definitive determination about who in fact is the best looking district judge in the country. but edward r. coreman is not in the news today because of his looks. he is in the news because of his news. he is on the front page news

today because this morning he issued an absolutely ex currying resulting about an obama decision about contraception. it is a 59-page take down of the obama administration in which he berates the obama administration for quote a strong showing of bad faith and improper political influence. what the obama did is this. emergency birth control, plan b, was available for women 17 and older without prescription. but because of the age restriction you couldn't find it on the shelves. you had to ask the firm sift. if you were under 17 you had to get a prescription. but doctors and scientists at fda determined that plan b was safe without the restrictions. they were about to lift them to put them on drugstore shelves. that was at the end of 2011. it was a shocking and

controversial move, the obama administration stepped in and stopped it. health and human services administrator blocked services to emergency birth control. it was the first time, first time ever, the hhs had ever publicly overruled the fda. in history. which naturally brought forth allegations the administration was putting politics above science. this decision did, after all, approximately coincide with the start of the 2012 presidential campaign. but the reason the obama administration gave for overruling signs behind the fda decision was essentially some girls start their periods early. quote, about 10% of girls are able to bear children at 11.1 years of age. there are differences between the older adolescent and younger girls of reproductive age. the product would be available without prescription for all girls of reproductive age. that explanation did not impress the new england journurn journa

medicine. it was based on politics rather than science. it cannot be based on issues of safety since a 12-year-old can purchase a lethal dose of acetaminophen in any pharmacy for about $11. no questions asked. the side effect of adverse effect of a $50 dose of levonorgestrel are nausea and delay of menses by several days. he wrote the motivation for secretary's action is obviously political and even with eyes shut to the motivation for the secretary's decision the reason she provide are so unpersuasive are to call into question her good faith. he found that it is hardly clear the secretary had the power to issue the order and if she did have the authority her decision was arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable. and he reversed that decision ordering fda to make emergency birth control available without a prescription and without point

of sale age restrictions within 30 dayes. which is to say that a big and important change in public health policy is set to take effect next month. politically there is a broader point to be recognized here. our politics will seemingly never stop going hay wire when women's reproductive rights are on the table. there is a special universe of politics where the issue of control over women's reproductive processes exist apart from regular rules of any other kind of politics. there is no politics and crazy vagina politics. you can see it the way this issue played out in this particular administration. you will see two clips of the same president talking about science and medicine from two different political universes. the first is the normal political universe. the second is a crazy vaginal political universe. >> to ensure that in this new administration we base our public policies on the soundest science. that we appoint sooif scientific advisors based on credentials

and experience. neither politics or ideology. ander with open and honest with the american people about the science behind their decisiones. that's how we will hashes of power of science to achieve our goals. as the father two of daughters, i think it is important for us to make sure that, you know, we apply some common sense to various rules when it comes to over-the-counter medicine. and as i understand it, the reason kathleen made this decision, was she could not be confident that a 10-year-old or an 11-year-old going to a drugstore should be able, alongside bubble gum or batteries, be able to buy a -- a

medication that potentially if not used properly could end up having an adverse effect. >> here have you a reasonable pro science administration making an skplisibleably archie bunker argument. even though the administration has no ideological or commit plit cal commitment to control young women's sex lives because the politics in this country get crazy around women having sex. simple as that. joining me at the table, nancy northup, and the crunch feminis collective, and pulitzer prize winner a 5e7b lecture. let's say you're barack obama. and you're like, do not touch this with a million-foot pole because you do not want the sentences 11-year-old and pregnant next to anything that happens in the news in election

cycle. and you politically interfere. let's just concede that, right? but the case is so weak, the judge now overturns it. and so, you get the best of both worlds. you don't have to own it politically. you went to bat for the fathers and mothers of america. but now this is going to be made public anyway. what do you think about that argument? >> if that's the case, we would hope then that the president will not have the department of justice appeal this decision and do what's right -- >> there is a cast of whether that's the case. >> right. and do what is right for american women. can which is, let this be over-the-counter for women of all ages. >> why are you so cynical? >> i'm not. i was playing host. >> is it possible that president truly does care. he has a daughter in this age group. and i don't know, parents on this panel, but do you want your 11, 12, 13-year-old going in and getting this next to the tick tacks and the thin mint and being able to just do this without your permission, without any kind of parental guidance whatsoever? we have driver license

restrictions, right? you can't get a driver's license in this country. you can't vote until you are 18. you can't buy alcohol until you are 21. there are restrictions for a reason. i don't think there is anything wrong with a cut-off. >> what the judge says, is this is 7b just about 11-year-olds. this is about the majority of folks who access, women, who can't get it when they need it because the pharmacy gate is down, because -- >> the cut-off is 17? isn't that a reasonable cut-off? >> you still have to t.go to th pharmacist. >> there is the two things. the principle of the cut off of 17 then the after effect of being 17. >> and it is claiming it is safe -- >> emergency contraception. >> emergency contraception. but the first part of his statement is that he has two daughters and the question i care most about is what context young women are growing up in and what they are being taught

to think about, their own access to reproductive healthcare. do we want them to grow up in a context where they are talking about shame and fair and stig na about what they need or think they need or walking into a pharmacy and get what they need? or are we asking them to grow up in an era with information is plentiful. they get all of the information they need. i think the bigger opportunity with this ruling is to push that conversation and say, what context do we want young women growing up in? >> i'm feeling old. i grew up in a time when wr 12 13-year-olds shouldn't be having sex. we are talking about girls, not women's rights, but girls who don't have the ka pass it the make the decisions. now able to go in and willie nilly get there without any checks. >> i think the image of 12 or 13-year-old going in to get emergency contraception is not scary to me. the image of a 12 or 13-year-old

pregnant without resources an ak set to support, that is scary. >> what about a deadly std. no one is talking about that. >> condoms for men are easily accessible -- >> there are no prescription for condoms. i want to make this clear. there or two issues on the table. there is this principled issue about this kind of, what our moral values are about 12 and 13-year-old girls having sex, right? there is a medical issue about the actual taking of the thing that you put in your mouth and chemicals going through your body is physically harmful. which science determines is not really. some nausea. then there's the practical issue of what the policy, as currently constituted is, which is with the cut off at 17 means everyone has to go to get it behind the counter. and research done indicates that in many cases, that cuts off the access to emergency contraception to women who can could get it, right? >> right. i think what is getting lost in

actually a lot of the press coverage today is back to this -- >> don't get me started. >> judge coreman spent eight years with the case. spent a lot of time with the record. he said flatly, this isn't about 11-year-olds. that was an excuse. an excuse used by the administration. this isn't about whether there are two standards when we approve drugs for overthe counter sales. a standard for all drugs except contraception. which is it safe and effective for all ages. and then politics. the judge says we can't do that. we have to have one standard. we have to be fair. >> i also want it talk about ak speps when we talk about access and access to healthcare and medicine we have to talk about who is most vulnerable if we increase restrictions. in this context, it is not just young women 11 and 12. but not having access to over the county emergency

contraception affects low income women, women of color of and i want to live in a world where everyone who needs healthcare, and it is safe for them, can get it. >> you don't need an abortion pill. >> it is not aabortion pill. >> i'm sorry. i threw that out there. >> you're trolling, karen. >> yeah. >> this is not like you are getting an -- >> this is a right wing talking -- >> it is not an abortion pill. >> all right. my point is still that this is not a need. this is something that he -- >> this is a need. here is the point i would say. i guess this goes back around to the original point about the politics of this. i understand why they are touchy. i do understand, if i were david axelrod. if i put myself in david axelrod's shoes and we sat in the oval office and talked about politics. i would say, about all of the

thousand battles you have to fight, let's just not fight this one. an amoral perspective. this could be explosive because of the nexus of this extremely provocative example. >> it is scary when you have a member of the president's cabinet that oversees the agency that is supposed to be following rules and regulations of drugs. we want to trust the fda in all decisiones. what does it mean we can't trust in decision of reproductive health. it is just important that agencies do not get involved in politics and can make these kind of healthcare decisions on the merit. >> that's an important point. there is a legal process here, which is the basis of the decision. >> i want young women to have control over their bodies because then they can control their destiny. >> yes. >> that's the core of the issue. i want you to have control over it from 11 to 87. i want you to have control. >> when they get jobs they can

control -- >> that's the new standard. >> in my household -- >> the head of the fda with a drug contingency of tamper proof bottle on emergency contraception. you have to have a job to open it. >> here is the thing, it doesn't work, right. >> right. >> what helps is more information, more access, more safety, less stigma. that's what our goal should be. >> i want to talk about this camel hairs thing. i think it is important. like someone said something we don't like. but there is some deep stuff there. you wrote a great piece about it. let's talk about that after this break. [ both ] ugh! when it came to our plants... we were so confused. how much is too much water? too little? until we got miracle-gro moisture control. it does what basic soils don't by absorbing more water, so it's there when plants need it. yeah, they're bigger and more beautiful. guaranteed. in pots. in the ground. in a ukulele. are you kidding me? that was my idea.

with the right soil... everyone grows with miracle-gro.

by going low. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 like offering schwab etfs tdd# 1-800-345-2550

with the lowest operating expenses tdd# 1-800-345-2550 in their respective lipper categories -- tdd# 1-800-345-2550 lower than ishares tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and vanguard. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 and with all our etfs commission-free tdd# 1-800-345-2550 when traded online in a schwab account, tdd# 1-800-345-2550 it leaves our investors with more money to invest. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 something they've come to count on with us. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 so as investors continue to set their portfolio goals high, tdd# 1-800-345-2550 we help keep their costs of investing low. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 give us a call and open an account today. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 carefully consider prospectus information, including tdd# 1-800-345-2550 investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 request a prospectus by calling schwab at 800-435-4000. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 read it carefully before investing. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 fees and expenses apply. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 investing involves risks, including loss of principal. tdd# 1-800-345-2550

just to put a button on this. there is a lot more to talk about. but there are statistics from sexually active women from ages 15 to 44. it used to be prescription all wait through, then the fda process which has been lit gatd going back to the bush administration. that it becomes more available. more people can use it. can we talk about this line. it is kind of lame but whatever. i hate the genre of someone said

something and let's jump on the thing that someone said. even when it is right wing saying crazy things. i try to stay out of that genre. the president is talking about she is brilliant, dedicated, tough and the best looking attorney general. it's true. come on. a friend of the president. i thought it was interesting that the defense of this. here is gretchen carlson on fox news defending those comments. take a look. >> yeah, big deal. yeah, she is. she does happen to be good looking. i just think we have come to a place in society where everyone is so ultimately sensitive that you can't say anything any more. she is, she's pretty. so what. >> and dillon buyers of politico. how did it become so difficult to call a woman good looking in public? how did it? >> because i'm a human being and not an object for male attention and male desire. and i think that the key with

carmella harris, there are a million things you can say about her that don't have to to do with what she looks like. the president started out about how she is brilliant, hardworking. talk about her job, what is relevant to the conversation. >> president pl president, you can call me the best looking contributor to msnbc any day of the week. i mean, really? >> please. >> yeah, here is what i care the most about. what i care the most about is how many women the president has in his administration, what they are doing, how he talks about them. i think it was in poor taste and, you know, annoying that this is what is happening. but i think it is telling, right? this is how men talk about women. this is how all of us talk about women. >> it is how all of us talk about women. very good point. >> it is not surprising it comes through in this political context. both of those things can be true. it is not the worst thing he's ever done. but i care much more about women

who are in policy, positions, and who have power and what they are doing and how he talks about them and their mind. >> and whether he will appeal -- >> good point. sometimes the conversation about this white house with respect to women, moves on two different tracks, right? there is the genre of the harris stuff. the genre is it a boy's club inside the west wing. and where the administration has been on the substantive things. >> so when you have the con ver -- that's the one -- that would be the place to take this discussion, right? >> take it there. we're on television -- >> we talk pictures of the white house and saw all those men in the oval office. let's talk about that. >> he found lilly led better, one of the first things he did in office. we are talking about it as if he doesn't have a track record. >> i hold him to a higher standard. i expect him to say, oh, she's good looking -- that is lazy --

>> she wasn't insulted. >> i wasn't upset or insulted. he should stick to the substance with b when he is talking about her in a professional setting. >> what is a -- how are we to understand the administration's commitment to reproductive choice, broadly the tremendous political effort put in by kathleen herself to lobby for inclusion of contraception and the affordable care act that they took from the bishops that was a serious political fight they did not have to pick, basically, right? how do you square that? that record with their record in this specific case in n which you have a federal court judge saying, this is the -- more or less saying this is the bush administration redocks. >> oh, not more or less, definitely saying that. >> how do you square those two, though? >> obviously, the decision to make contraception generally available without co-pay under the affordable care act is the most tremendous advance for women's reproductive health in history. it's huge. here and the judge said it, you

know, there was an election coming up and without question it was a political decision. that's why, thank goodness, we have courts that hold the government accountable when it does that. >> do you have an expectation about the appeal? i mean, do you think they are going to appeal? >> i'm not going to predict about that. but again, if the president wants to live up to being a strong -- >> the election is over, right? if there is expediency, the election is over and there's an opportunity there. >> i want to take issue with what affect of the affordable care act was. i have an even higher standard than access to contraception. that's baseline, right? the affordable care act makes it hardener a lot of cases to get access and in the insurance exchange. >> this is a last minute deal. >> right. >> at the point of a legislative gun we must say. >> i got it. but that gun is always held up, right? >> incidentally, that's american -- that's american

politics. >> so the question is, i mean, to the point of the president's feminist bona fides, this is the moment to fight, right? i have felt in many cases that he could have used a lot more of his political capitol on this issue. i understand why he hasn't but i still don't think it's right. >> i think it is useful to leave this with this test we see. a concrete thing we can see. about are they going to appeal or not. nancy north up from center of reproive rights. that was a lot of fun, thank you. >> move over target. there are people in programs, people on disability. that's coming up. with the spark miles card from capital one,

bjorn earns unlimited rewards for his small business. take these bags to room 12 please. [ garth ] bjorn's small business earns double miles on every purchase every day. produce delivery. [ bjorn ] just put it on my spark card. [ garth ] why settle for less? ahh, oh! [ garth ] great businesses deserve unlimited rewards. here's your wake up call. [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase every day. what's in your wallet? [ crows ] now where's the snooze button? so, you want to protect your place from burglars? buy a lock. buy a dog. mow the lawn. get a sign. hang curtains. plant something thorny. buy another lock. and of course talk to farmers. hi. [ both ] hi. ♪ we are farmers ♪ buhm, ba-dum-buhm, buhm-buhm-buhm ♪ if you have high cholesterol, here's some information that may be worth looking into. in a clinical trial versus lipitor,

crestor got more high-risk patients' bad cholesterol to a goal of under 100. getting to goal is important, especially if you have high cholesterol plus any of these risk factors because you could be at increased risk for plaque buildup in your arteries over time. and that's why when diet and exercise alone aren't enough to lower cholesterol i prescribe crestor. [ female announcer ] crestor is not right for everyone. like people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant or may become pregnant. tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking. call your doctor right away if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired, have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. is your cholesterol at goal? ask your doctor about crestor. [ female announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. [ male announcer ] book ahead and save up to 20 percent at doubletree.com, so you can sit back, relax and enjoy.

doubletree by hilton. where the little things mean everything.

when today began, 149 small and midsize airport towers were set to be shut down this sunday due to sequestering. so it understandably captured the public's imagination and the faa's handy map of the states was impressive as well as the admonition that tens of thousands of pilots will have to rely increasingly on see and avoid. you do not want it read the phrase, see and avoid, anywhere near the phrase, tens of thousands of pilots. to drive the point home, usa today on-line offered this graphic, when airplanes collide

so we can predict the exact time we can better foresee the problem is when planes taxi and on approach. there are a handful of lawsuits by local communits to halt tower closures. but lo and behold, two days from the first possibly dangerous closure, it has been delayed until may 15th. according to secretary ray lahood make sure communities and pilots understand changes at their local airports. in other word, no promise these closures will be permanently headed o 06. tower story captured our attention today in the editorial meeting as our executive producer was describing exactly what see and avoid meant. i'm coming in, where are you, is there anyone ai around? it was a way to focus attention on the real tangible consequence of sequestration.

it is also today's bright shiny ofkt sequestration. we were also supposed to breath a huge sigh of relief. but on parallel track in realtime, we are learning that cancer clinics have been forced to turn away thousands of medicare patients due to sequestration because of the method in which chemotherapy treatment is paid out, 2% cut m medicare put the clinics in a bind. as chief executor of one clinic put it, a lot of us are in disbelief it happened. it is a choice between patience and staying in business. some cost will likely be passed on to patience. ai aaccording to the washington post, it is unclear if the hospitals still have the capacity to absorb these patient. today there was no 11th hour reprieve. no horrible unintended avoidable consequence. in austin, texas, local nop profit wbc opportunity is being forced to cut nearly $400,000 from its senior meal on wheels

and head start programs due to federal funding cuts spurred by sequestration. for those folks, today bringing no effect in policy. places like food finders food bank are expecting a 5% drop thanks to cuts in the community development block grant program. nothing happened today to change that. there are local news stories like these across the can country and all because of sequestration. automatic austerity. it doesn't e there. because other sequestration cuts place a greater demand on the nonprofit. 4 million meals to seniors. 600,000 women, infant and children from wic program. those people affected by those cuts may have today heard the news that tower closures have been delayed until june 15th. they got no such good news themselves. poverty and illness can smash a life to bits as surely as a plane crash and the agencies and

organizations tasked with watching out to make sure that doesn't happen are evacuating their towers. we'll be right back with clip 3. [ male announcer ] this is bob, a regular guy with an irregular heartbeat. the usual, bob? not today. [ male announcer ] bob has afib: atrial fibrillation not caused by a heart valve problem, a condition that puts him at greater risk for a stroke. [ gps ] turn left. i don't think so. [ male announcer ] for years, bob took warfarin, and made a monthly trip to the clinic to get his blood tested.

but not anymore. bob's doctor recommended a different option: once-a-day xarelto®. xarelto® is the first and only once-a-day prescription blood thinner for patients with afib not caused by a heart valve problem, that doesn't require routine blood monitoring. like warfarin, xarelto® is proven effective to reduce the risk of an afib-related stroke. there is limited data on how these drugs compare when warfarin is well managed. no routine blood monitoring means bob can spend his extra time however he likes. new zealand! xarelto® is just one pill a day, taken with the evening meal. and with no dietary restrictions, bob can eat the healthy foods he likes. do not stop taking xarelto® rivaroxaban without talking to the doctor who prescribes it for you. stopping may increase your risk of having a stroke. get medical help right away if you develop any signs or symptoms of bleeding, like unusual bruising or tingling. you may have a higher risk of bleeding if you take xarelto® with aspirin products, nsaids or blood thinners. talk to your doctor before taking xarelto®

if you currently have abnormal bleeding. xarelto® can cause bleeding, which can be serious, and rarely may lead to death. you are likely to bruise more easily on xarelto®, and it may take longer for bleeding to stop. tell your doctors you are taking xarelto® before any planned medical or dental procedures. before starting xarelto®, tell your doctor about any conditions, such as kidney, liver or bleeding problems. ready to change your routine? ask your doctor about once-a-day xarelto®. for more information including cost support options, call 1-888-xarelto or visit goxarelto.com.

this sharp surprising letter was written by eight former commissioners of the social security administration. it contends a recent news story on disability insurance made millions of americans who rely on the service look like moochers and welfare cheats. this letter is not addressed to fox news or rush limbaugh. in fact, the recipient of the letter may surprise pup that's coming up. right now, the first you a psalm twitter hits today. is your team's owner a major league a-hole? an all-inclusive list of the incredible a-holerry that goes n within the major league

baseball. separating political power hitters, those active in politics from those who not even swinging. who aren't. behavior with fair and foul and it pains me almost more than i can say, moj so correct to say the cub's owner joe rickets get top a-hole prize here. mojo recalling this amazing campaign story, the ameritrade founder depicting president obama as a fact black metrosexual abe lincoln. the most innocuous quadrant, pirates owner is compared favorably to an empty chair. see where your teams land on mothersjones.com. the holy grail for those who care about where their food comes from. mark bitman, this latest piece for the times magazine now posted ontime. bitman writes that food has

evolved and now fast-food chains are offering food that is not only healthy, tasty, humanely raised and cheap. you should check it out. and the third awesomist thing on the internet today deskriefs from the introduction of california attorney general, in which the president calls her the best looking attorney general in the country. this list hatched, the 13 best looking attorneys general. you have your bo biden of delaware. total shoe-in. and for those with a bit after wild side, doug gansler of maryland you can find all of the links for tonight's click 3 on our website.

select your click 3 nominees on twitter. we'll be right back. welcnew york state, where cutting taxes for families and businesses is our business. we've reduced taxes and lowered costs to save businesses more than two billion dollars to grow jobs, cut middle class income taxes to the lowest rate in sixty years, and we're creating tax free zones for business startups. the new new york is working creating tens of thousands of new businesses, and we're just getting started. to grow or start your business

visit thenewny.com [ babies crying ] surprise -- your house was built on an ancient burial ground. [ ghosts moaning ] surprise -- your car needs a new transmission. [ coyote howls ] how about no more surprises? now you can get all the online trading tools you need without any surprise fees. ♪ it's not rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade.

[ male announcer ] from the way the bristles move to the way they clean, once you try an oral-b deep sweep power brush, you'll never go back to a regular manual brush. its three cleaning zones with dynamic power bristles

reach between teeth with more brush movements to remove up to 100% more plaque than a regular manual brush. and even 76% more plaque than sonicare flexcare in hard to reach areas. oral-b deep sweep 5000 power brush. life opens up when you do. all right, so if you clicked on the drudge report today, this is what you would say. in response to the jobs numbers by the bureau of labor statistics. numbers were disappointing. american employers added 88,000 jobs in march. less than half of what was

expected. we should take that with a grain of salt. these numbers are preliminary and curse by rhode islancursory. jobs in january were revised. in february, revised from 236,000 to 268. but the drudge report focuses on the 90 million out of work force for a couple of reasons. one, unemployment rate last month went down dropping from 7.7 to 7.6%. we know the drudge report won't lead with that as top line number. and two, you probably haven't encountered this yet. but on the right wing there is a growing course that identifies work force participation and dropping out of the work force as the great silent surge of the president barack obama. to these folks, basically what obama's america looks like is that under the cover of existing programs, people have been moving from the work force into the social safety net in the form of social security insurance and social security disability insurance. >> just over the last three months, there have been more

people going on disability than actually find willing jobs in this country? >> yeah. i don't think this is what american voters had in mind when they voted for change in 2008. >> the administration made dependency a watch word ofity administration. and therefore, they have reduced the standard for people -- >> so it's easier -- >> oh, it is much easier. >> a lot of men, 25, 26 years old, sitting on the porch all day long because every two weeks they get a crazy check and they are on disability. >> baltimore sun on tuesday, general goldburg wrote as the nature of the economy programs, can disprograms are sometimes taking the place of welfare. >> the reason the drudge report went with its headline jumped the species barrier into the mainstream area. very highly respected, quoting

from the planet money piece, disability has been a defacto welfare program for people without a lot of education or job skills. but it wasn't supposed to serve this purpose. it is not a retraining program designed to get people back on their feet. that piece sparked huge controversy as we enter budgets and washington contemplates so-called entitlement reformt, stakes are very high. so high that eight commissioners of the social security administration wrote a detailed letter to npr to express concerns with the report stating quote as former commissioners of the age sin we could not sit on the side lines and witness this perspective on the disability programs threaten to pull the rug out from millions of people with severe disabilities. drastic consequences for some of america's most vulnerable people. and this is exactly what drudge report readers want. joining me from newton, massachusetts, is social

security commissioner 3under presidents bush and obama. i should say, we invited reporter hannah walt and producer alex bloomberg from planet money to join us tonight. they were unavailable an but have expressed interest in coming on in the future. michael, i will begin with you. why did you decide to write this letter? >> we decided to write this letter because the factual premise of the npr article is just not true. they use loaded terms like skyrocketi skyrocketing. basically told the american people there is some unexpected sudden change in disability policy. >> and it is not true. you read the trustees reports for the last 20 years, we have been saying since 1994 that there's going to be a solve ency issue in the disability trust fund in 2016. and that exactly what is going to happen. so it is a little bit like saying daylight is skyrocketing

in april. it is not skyrocketing. it is changing because of things that we understand. and the same thing is true in disability. >> but there are, when you go through, when you listen to the piece and read the article, there are a bunch of eye-popping statistics about how much it expanded. has it tripled cents 1980. in terms of the amount of people on disability. there are more people on it now. there is also statistics about the degree to which people, once they go on to disability, can get back into the labor force. that's another concern. and then the third thing that i found persuasive about the piece or at least not persuasive but provocative was the idea that the people, the diagnoses that are expanding in disability are those that seem the most nebulous about things like chronic pain. than people don't have chronic pain. chronic pain or psychological conditions as opposed to broken leges from factory incident, et cetera. maybe you can respond to those.

actually rb we becka. sorry. >> sorry, commissioner. i think if we have a conversation about the social security disability programs, i think it is really important to start with facts. >> i hate those, but continue. >> i apologize because i'm about to spew a lot of them pz go to town. >> you start with the fact these are vital programs with people with significant disabilities. they a they subjects of facts. here of the facts. . is built stand the disability standard is t the disability standards in the united states are the strictest in the world. 60% or more of people who apply for these benefits are denied. the catch-all thoughts are

misplaced and not supported by facts. many of those looking for benefits have severe diseases, cancer. one in five people have a disability. one in ten has severe disability. we are talking about a subset of people in this country with disabilities because the program, by virtue of a strict standard, is for people with most severe disabilities. >> is that persuasive to you? >> yes. i would say a couple of of things. one in terms of the demographic argument. and the bureau of economic defense find that the demographics are aging in population. for women it is only 4%. there is a substantial amount not demographically driven. a senate investigation found adds much as 25% of

participation could be waste. we don't know the exact number but to say that -- one thing, the stat story provision or criteria of what makes someone eligible and then the actual enforcement and application. just because the letter of the law says something doesn't mean there are people who are certified to being disabled who aren't. >> so the question is, what is driving the expanse people disability and one big question, as pop lakes ages, we expect more people to file for disability because people who are older are more likely and the question is, what percentage of this big change we're seeing is driven by that? >> okay. so i can see there are a couple of economists out there. i have a suspicion as to whose payroll they're on. but you just have to go to the trustee's report. we covered this. every single year. how much of the change is due to what? and you can go back for 20 years. it has hardly changed at all.

it is exactly as it was predicted the last time congress legislated in this area in 1994. and it is almost -- most of it is simply the baby boomers going through their disability prone years. just like we are getting a lot more retirement applications. surprise, surprise. baby boomers are getting older. the exact same thing with disability. you get people a lot sicker at 55 than at 25. so we get a lot more disability applications. >> do you believe that there is no waste in the system? what percentage of applications are mistakes or waste or fraud or abuse? what percentage. >> look, you can't have $150 billion program whereat the end of the day, a lot of cases require judgment. mental disabilities, pain, you know, you can't run a blood test. you can't run a genetic test. there is some degree of fraud in the program. absolutely. no one -- i mean, senate

committee tried for five years to try to show that there was massive fraud and they couldn't do it. and they ended up distorting our own internal quality statistics. on, you know, the quality of the paperwork. instead of being able to show that there was broad fraud. it is under 1% of the cases and no one's ever been able to show that it is anything different. >> rebecca, you work on the front lines with folks trying to get disability. i would like it hear what your experience has been about how much of that is out there? >> i think that's another one of the central misconception says that either it is incredibly easy to get benefit or that you can scam the system. i represent people who have significant disabilities who have been denied despite significant disabilities purely because they didn't have enough medical efd because one of their doctors didn't submit records or because a hospital they had been to didn't submit records. when i help and develop the record by getting evidence of all of the impairments they have, that's the thing that can

make a real difference in someone's case. but i can tell you, this is a system that is incredibly hard it scam. >> over time, what is interesting, applicationes have gone up quite a bit. but the actual awards have ticked up. there is actual lay growing -- >> and actually ticked down. >> chris, yeah. you're missing -- >> soar, hold on. >> you are missing the alice and wonderland aspect. >> i want it hear it. hold on. we have to take a break. you can tell us about it after this. when it came to our plants... we were so confused. how much is too much water? too little? until we got miracle-gro moisture control. it does what basic soils don't by absorbing more water, so it's there when plants need it. yeah, they're bigger and more beautiful. guaranteed. in pots. in the ground. in a ukulele. are you kidding me? that was my idea. with the right soil... everyone grows with miracle-gro.

tdd: 1-800-345-2550 schwab bank was built with tdd: 1-800-345-2550 all the value and convenience investors want. tdd: 1-800-345-2550 like no atm fees, worldwide. tdd: 1-800-345-2550 and no nuisance fees. tdd: 1-800-345-2550 plus deposit checks with mobile deposit,

tdd: 1-800-345-2550 and manage your cash and investments tdd: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab's mobile app. tdd: 1-800-345-2550 no wonder schwab bank has grown to over 70 billion in assets. tdd: 1-800-345-2550 so if you're looking for a bank that's in your corner, tdd: 1-800-345-2550 not just on the corner, tdd: 1-800-345-2550 call, click or visit to start banking with schwab bank today.

so before the break, i was indicating this chart that shows

applications have been going up for disability but the awards have gone up a little bit and now tick down. and michael, you wanted to make a point about "alice in wonderland." >> so i was a bush appointee. there was hysteria about the program, but in the other direction. my third day on the job, most of the ways and means committee screamed at me because, in their view, with the backlogs and the agency was cruel, it didn't want to approve cases. i had members saying on the record, although it was expunged later, they believed we denied all cases and made everyone appeal. so i was getting creamed from that perspective. we stuck to the stat store statutory standard and what happened is a percentage of cases dropped dramatically. both on initial decisions and appeals. and it is not because we did anything terribly differently. we stuck pretty closely to the

statutory standard. it is that we get economically desperate people applying in recessions. but we did not turn the program into a welfare a groom and allowed those cases, we rejected them. that's why at at appeals level, it is the lowest level of approval since 1978. how could the whole program be busting loose and turning into a welfare program if our allowance rates drop sewed dramatically. >> there is a problem here, right -- >> explain that. >> well -- >> wait a minute. >> winning the nobel prize for understanding there was this knowledge problem. that the government doesn't always have the information of what is going on in the hinter lands. there are these applications that are reviewed. what happened if the physician is misrepresenting the diagnosis to exaggerate for someone to seem more disabled. that's what the npr report showed. >> the report did not show that. >> that was not in the npr series at all. >> mike just said the waste and fraud is 1%.

>> less than 1%. >> so i think it strains -- if you look at britain, for example, brattian's strattory standard is different from ours. but they did something interesting recently. they said if you are on disability insurance we will give you a physical exam to verify whether or not you are disabled. a third of the people in britain refused to sign up for the physical exam and were dropped from the program pz but that's not our program. >> chris, chris, chris. >> let me finish the point. >> sof the next group that did the physical exam, 55% were determined to be physically disabled and another 25% were okay to work. we don't cheat the way they do, so i understand when the standard is harder in our country. and conceivable that there is an excuse to the system. >> michael? thz that's straight out of baltimore sun op ed piece and that is crazy talk. brits are getting around to what

we are doing and have been doing for years and trying to do more of. we did reviewes. we did 435,000 of them, my last year as commissioner. and every single year from my seven fiscal years, i went up to the congress and asked for a lot more resources to do those. because there's a 10 to 1 return to the taxpayers. and congress refused to do it. i pushed it up and we should do more of those. but we are doing almost half a million medical reviewes a year. and to have someone in the baltimore sun hold up the uk, can which is just coming around to copying what we do, i mean, that's crazy talk. absolute crazy talk. >> quickly, rebecca. do you think too many cases are being denied? >> if anything, my opinion would be it is in the other direction. i see people everyday who are refused disability. i have a client with osteoporosis and anemia.